DOCSLIB.ORG

Computational Topology Lecture Notes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Computational Topology Lecture Notes Computational Topology Lecture notes Francis Lazarus and Arnaud de Mesmay 2016-2018 Contents 1 Panorama4 1.0.1 Topology..........................................4 1.0.2 Computational Topology..............................6 2 Planar Graphs8 2.1 Topology..............................................9 2.1.1 The Jordan Curve Theorem............................ 10 2.1.2 Euler’s Formula.................................... 12 2.2 Kuratowski’s Theorem..................................... 15 2.2.1 The Subdivision Version.............................. 15 2.2.2 The Minor Version.................................. 19 2.3 Other Planarity Characterizations............................ 19 2.4 Planarity Test........................................... 22 2.5 Drawing with Straight Lines................................ 27 3 Surfaces and Embedded Graphs 32 3.1 Surfaces............................................... 32 3.1.1 Surfaces and cellularly embedded graphs................. 32 3.1.2 Polygonal schemata................................. 35 3.1.3 Classification of surfaces............................. 36 3.2 Maps................................................. 39 3.3 The Genus of a Map...................................... 43 3.4 Homotopy............................................. 45 3.4.1 Groups, generators and relations....................... 46 3.4.2 Fundamental groups, the combinatorial way............... 46 3.4.3 Fundamental groups, the topological way................. 50 3.4.4 Covering spaces.................................... 52 4 The Homotopy Test 55 4.1 Dehn’s Algorithm........................................ 56 4.2 van Kampen Diagrams.................................... 58 4.2.1 Disk Diagrams..................................... 58 4.2.2 Annular Diagrams.................................. 59 4.3 Gauss-Bonnet Formula.................................... 59 4.4 Quad Systems........................................... 61 4.5 Canonical Representatives................................. 62 4.5.1 The Four Bracket Lemma............................. 62 1 CONTENTS 2 4.5.2 Bracket Flattening.................................. 64 4.5.3 Canonical Representatives............................ 65 4.6 The Homotopy Test....................................... 67 5 Minimum Weight Bases 68 5.1 Minimum Basis of the Fundamental Group of a Graph............. 69 5.2 Minimum Basis of the Cycle Space of a Graph................... 70 5.2.1 The Greedy Algorithm............................... 70 5.3 Uniqueness of Shortest Paths............................... 73 5.4 First Homology Group of Surfaces............................ 74 5.4.1 Back to Graphs..................................... 74 5.4.2 Homology of Surfaces................................ 75 5.5 Minimum Basis of the Fundamental Group of a Surface............ 77 5.5.1 Dual Maps and Cutting............................... 77 5.5.2 Homotopy Basis Associated with a Tree-Cotree Decomposition. 77 5.5.3 The Greedy Homotopy Basis........................... 78 5.6 Minimum Basis of the First Homology Group of a Surface........... 80 5.6.1 Homology Basis Associated with a Tree-Cotree Decomposition. 80 5.6.2 The Greedy Homology Basis........................... 80 6 Homology 83 6.1 Complexes............................................. 83 6.2 Homology............................................. 85 6.2.1 Chain complexes................................... 85 6.2.2 Simplicial homology................................. 86 6.2.3 Examples and the question of the coefficient ring........... 87 6.2.4 Betti numbers and Euler-Poincaré formula................ 88 6.2.5 Homology as a functor............................... 88 6.3 Homology computations................................... 89 6.3.1 Over a field....................................... 89 6.3.2 Computation of the Betti numbers: the Delfinado-Edelsbrunner algorithm......................................... 89 6.3.3 Over the integers: the Smith-Poincaré reduction algorithm.... 90 7 Persistent Homology 93 7.1 Persistence Modules...................................... 94 7.1.1 Classification of Persistence Modules.................... 95 7.1.2 Restrictions of Persistence Modules..................... 97 7.2 Application to Topological Inference.......................... 98 7.3 Computing the Barcode................................... 99 7.3.1 Compatible Boundary Basis........................... 101 7.3.2 Algorithm........................................ 102 7.4 Persistence Diagrams..................................... 103 7.4.1 Stability of Persistence Diagrams....................... 104 CONTENTS 3 8 Knots and 3-Dimensional Computational Topology 106 8.1 Knots................................................. 107 8.2 Knot diagrams.......................................... 108 8.3 The knot complement..................................... 111 8.3.1 Homotopy........................................ 112 8.3.2 Homology........................................ 114 8.3.3 Triangulations..................................... 114 8.4 An algorithm for unknot recognition.......................... 115 8.4.1 Normal surface theory............................... 116 8.4.2 Trivial knot and spanning disks......................... 118 8.4.3 Normalization of spanning disks........................ 120 8.4.4 Haken sum, fundamental and vertex normal surfaces........ 123 8.5 Knotless graphs......................................... 126 9 Undecidability in Topology 128 9.1 The Halting Problem...................................... 129 9.1.1 Turing Machines................................... 129 9.1.2 Undecidability of the Halting Problem................... 130 9.2 Decision Problems in Group Theory.......................... 131 9.3 Decision Problems in Topology.............................. 134 9.3.1 The Contractibility and Transformation Problems........... 134 9.3.2 The Homeomorphism Problem........................ 136 9.4 Proof of the Undecidability of the Group Problems................ 139 2 9.4.1 Z -Machines...................................... 139 9.4.2 Useful Constructs in Combinatorial Group Theory.......... 140 9.4.3 Undecidability of the Generalized Word Problem............ 141 1 Panorama Contents 1.0.1 Topology........................................4 1.0.2 Computational Topology............................6 1.0.1 Topology. Topology deals with the study of spaces. One of its goals is to answer the following broad class of questions: “Are these two spaces the same?” This naturally leads to the following subquestions: What is a space? General topology typically defines topological spaces via open • and closed sets. In order to avoid pathological examples, and with an eye towards applications, we will take a more concrete approach1: in this course, topological spaces will be obtained in the form of complexes, that is, by gluing together fundamental blocks. For example, gluing segments yields a graph, while by gluing together triangles one can obtain a surface (or something more compli- cated). The usual notions of distance on these fundamental blocks naturally induce a notion of proximity on such a complex, and therefore a topology whose properties are convenient to understand geometrically. 1This is by no means original: see introductory textbooks on algebraic topology, for example Hatcher [Hat02] or Stillwell [Sti93]. 4 1. PANORAMA 5 What is “the same” ? It very much depends on the context. The most common • equivalence relation is homeomorphism, which is a continuous map with a continuous inverse function. But in some contexts, when a space is embedded in another space, one will be interested in distinguishing between different embeddings. There, a convenient notion is isotopy : two embedded spaces will be considered the same if one can deform continuously one into the other one. Let us look at examples. Example 1: By gluing triangles or quadrilaterals, one can easily obtain a sphere (left figure), or a torus (right figure). Are these two spaces homeomorphic? Obviously not: the torus has a hole. But what is a hole? Two naive answers will guide us to the two fundamental constructs of algebraic topology: Homotopy: On the sphere, every closed curve can be deformed into a single • point. While on the torus, a curve going around the hole can not. Such a curve is not homotopic to a point. Homology: On the sphere, every closed curve separates the sphere into two • regions. While on the torus, a curve going around the hole is not separating. Such a curve is not trivial in homology. These intuitions can be formalized into algebraic objects which will constitute invariants (actually, functors) that one can use to distinguish topological spaces. 3 Example 2: By gluing segments in R , one can obtain the following knots. 1 Are they homeomorphic? Certainly: they are both homeomorphic to the circle S . But are they isotopic: can one be deformed into the other without crossing itself? The answer is negative, but this is not that easy to prove. One way to see it is that the knot on the left bounds a disk, while the one on the right does not. Studying which surfaces one can find in a 3-dimensional space is the goal of normal surface theory. 1. PANORAMA 6 1.0.2 Computational Topology. Computational topology deals with effective computations on topological spaces. The main question now becomes: “How to compute whether these two spaces are the same?” Note that since we study spaces described by gluings of fundamental blocks, in most instances this can be made into a well-defined algorithmic problem, with a finite input. One can then
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Unknot Recognition Through Quantifier Elimination
    UNKNOT RECOGNITION THROUGH QUANTIFIER ELIMINATION SYED M. MEESUM AND T. V. H. PRATHAMESH Abstract. Unknot recognition is one of the fundamental questions in low dimensional topology. In this work, we show that this problem can be encoded as a validity problem in the existential fragment of the first-order theory of real closed fields. This encoding is derived using a well-known result on SU(2) representations of knot groups by Kronheimer-Mrowka. We further show that applying existential quantifier elimination to the encoding enables an UnKnot Recogntion algorithm with a complexity of the order 2O(n), where n is the number of crossings in the given knot diagram. Our algorithm is simple to describe and has the same runtime as the currently best known unknot recognition algorithms. 1. Introduction In mathematics, a knot refers to an entangled loop. The fundamental problem in the study of knots is the question of knot recognition: can two given knots be transformed to each other without involving any cutting and pasting? This problem was shown to be decidable by Haken in 1962 [6] using the theory of normal surfaces. We study the special case in which we ask if it is possible to untangle a given knot to an unknot. The UnKnot Recogntion recognition algorithm takes a knot presentation as an input and answers Yes if and only if the given knot can be untangled to an unknot. The best known complexity of UnKnot Recogntion recognition is 2O(n), where n is the number of crossings in a knot diagram [2, 6]. More recent developments show that the UnKnot Recogntion recogni- tion is in NP \ co-NP.
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Topology and the Unique Games Conjecture
    Computational Topology and the Unique Games Conjecture Joshua A. Grochow1 Department of Computer Science & Department of Mathematics University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6466-0476 Jamie Tucker-Foltz2 Amherst College, Amherst, MA, USA [email protected] Abstract Covering spaces of graphs have long been useful for studying expanders (as “graph lifts”) and unique games (as the “label-extended graph”). In this paper we advocate for the thesis that there is a much deeper relationship between computational topology and the Unique Games Conjecture. Our starting point is Linial’s 2005 observation that the only known problems whose inapproximability is equivalent to the Unique Games Conjecture – Unique Games and Max-2Lin – are instances of Maximum Section of a Covering Space on graphs. We then observe that the reduction between these two problems (Khot–Kindler–Mossel–O’Donnell, FOCS ’04; SICOMP ’07) gives a well-defined map of covering spaces. We further prove that inapproximability for Maximum Section of a Covering Space on (cell decompositions of) closed 2-manifolds is also equivalent to the Unique Games Conjecture. This gives the first new “Unique Games-complete” problem in over a decade. Our results partially settle an open question of Chen and Freedman (SODA, 2010; Disc. Comput. Geom., 2011) from computational topology, by showing that their question is almost equivalent to the Unique Games Conjecture. (The main difference is that they ask for inapproxim- ability over Z2, and we show Unique Games-completeness over Zk for large k.) This equivalence comes from the fact that when the structure group G of the covering space is Abelian – or more generally for principal G-bundles – Maximum Section of a G-Covering Space is the same as the well-studied problem of 1-Homology Localization.
    [Show full text]
  • Algebraic Topology
    Algebraic Topology Vanessa Robins Department of Applied Mathematics Research School of Physics and Engineering The Australian National University Canberra ACT 0200, Australia. email: [email protected] September 11, 2013 Abstract This manuscript will be published as Chapter 5 in Wiley's textbook Mathe- matical Tools for Physicists, 2nd edition, edited by Michael Grinfeld from the University of Strathclyde. The chapter provides an introduction to the basic concepts of Algebraic Topology with an emphasis on motivation from applications in the physical sciences. It finishes with a brief review of computational work in algebraic topology, including persistent homology. arXiv:1304.7846v2 [math-ph] 10 Sep 2013 1 Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Homotopy Theory 4 2.1 Homotopy of paths . 4 2.2 The fundamental group . 5 2.3 Homotopy of spaces . 7 2.4 Examples . 7 2.5 Covering spaces . 9 2.6 Extensions and applications . 9 3 Homology 11 3.1 Simplicial complexes . 12 3.2 Simplicial homology groups . 12 3.3 Basic properties of homology groups . 14 3.4 Homological algebra . 16 3.5 Other homology theories . 18 4 Cohomology 18 4.1 De Rham cohomology . 20 5 Morse theory 21 5.1 Basic results . 21 5.2 Extensions and applications . 23 5.3 Forman's discrete Morse theory . 24 6 Computational topology 25 6.1 The fundamental group of a simplicial complex . 26 6.2 Smith normal form for homology . 27 6.3 Persistent homology . 28 6.4 Cell complexes from data . 29 2 1 Introduction Topology is the study of those aspects of shape and structure that do not de- pend on precise knowledge of an object's geometry.
    [Show full text]
  • Topics in Low Dimensional Computational Topology
    THÈSE DE DOCTORAT présentée et soutenue publiquement le 7 juillet 2014 en vue de l’obtention du grade de Docteur de l’École normale supérieure Spécialité : Informatique par ARNAUD DE MESMAY Topics in Low-Dimensional Computational Topology Membres du jury : M. Frédéric CHAZAL (INRIA Saclay – Île de France ) rapporteur M. Éric COLIN DE VERDIÈRE (ENS Paris et CNRS) directeur de thèse M. Jeff ERICKSON (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) rapporteur M. Cyril GAVOILLE (Université de Bordeaux) examinateur M. Pierre PANSU (Université Paris-Sud) examinateur M. Jorge RAMÍREZ-ALFONSÍN (Université Montpellier 2) examinateur Mme Monique TEILLAUD (INRIA Sophia-Antipolis – Méditerranée) examinatrice Autre rapporteur : M. Eric SEDGWICK (DePaul University) Unité mixte de recherche 8548 : Département d’Informatique de l’École normale supérieure École doctorale 386 : Sciences mathématiques de Paris Centre Numéro identifiant de la thèse : 70791 À Monsieur Lagarde, qui m’a donné l’envie d’apprendre. Résumé La topologie, c’est-à-dire l’étude qualitative des formes et des espaces, constitue un domaine classique des mathématiques depuis plus d’un siècle, mais il n’est apparu que récemment que pour de nombreuses applications, il est important de pouvoir calculer in- formatiquement les propriétés topologiques d’un objet. Ce point de vue est la base de la topologie algorithmique, un domaine très actif à l’interface des mathématiques et de l’in- formatique auquel ce travail se rattache. Les trois contributions de cette thèse concernent le développement et l’étude d’algorithmes topologiques pour calculer des décompositions et des déformations d’objets de basse dimension, comme des graphes, des surfaces ou des 3-variétés.
    [Show full text]
  • 25 HIGH-DIMENSIONAL TOPOLOGICAL DATA ANALYSIS Fr´Ed´Ericchazal
    25 HIGH-DIMENSIONAL TOPOLOGICAL DATA ANALYSIS Fr´ed´ericChazal INTRODUCTION Modern data often come as point clouds embedded in high-dimensional Euclidean spaces, or possibly more general metric spaces. They are usually not distributed uniformly, but lie around some highly nonlinear geometric structures with nontriv- ial topology. Topological data analysis (TDA) is an emerging field whose goal is to provide mathematical and algorithmic tools to understand the topological and geometric structure of data. This chapter provides a short introduction to this new field through a few selected topics. The focus is deliberately put on the mathe- matical foundations rather than specific applications, with a particular attention to stability results asserting the relevance of the topological information inferred from data. The chapter is organized in four sections. Section 25.1 is dedicated to distance- based approaches that establish the link between TDA and curve and surface re- construction in computational geometry. Section 25.2 considers homology inference problems and introduces the idea of interleaving of spaces and filtrations, a funda- mental notion in TDA. Section 25.3 is dedicated to the use of persistent homology and its stability properties to design robust topological estimators in TDA. Sec- tion 25.4 briefly presents a few other settings and applications of TDA, including dimensionality reduction, visualization and simplification of data. 25.1 GEOMETRIC INFERENCE AND RECONSTRUCTION Topologically correct reconstruction of geometric shapes from point clouds is a classical problem in computational geometry. The case of smooth curve and surface reconstruction in R3 has been widely studied over the last two decades and has given rise to a wide range of efficient tools and results that are specific to dimensions 2 and 3; see Chapter 35.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Treewidth of Triangulated 3-Manifolds
    On the Treewidth of Triangulated 3-Manifolds Kristóf Huszár Institute of Science and Technology Austria (IST Austria) Am Campus 1, 3400 Klosterneuburg, Austria [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5445-5057 Jonathan Spreer1 Institut für Mathematik, Freie Universität Berlin Arnimallee 2, 14195 Berlin, Germany [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6865-9483 Uli Wagner Institute of Science and Technology Austria (IST Austria) Am Campus 1, 3400 Klosterneuburg, Austria [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1494-0568 Abstract In graph theory, as well as in 3-manifold topology, there exist several width-type parameters to describe how “simple” or “thin” a given graph or 3-manifold is. These parameters, such as pathwidth or treewidth for graphs, or the concept of thin position for 3-manifolds, play an important role when studying algorithmic problems; in particular, there is a variety of problems in computational 3-manifold topology – some of them known to be computationally hard in general – that become solvable in polynomial time as soon as the dual graph of the input triangulation has bounded treewidth. In view of these algorithmic results, it is natural to ask whether every 3-manifold admits a triangulation of bounded treewidth. We show that this is not the case, i.e., that there exists an infinite family of closed 3-manifolds not admitting triangulations of bounded pathwidth or treewidth (the latter implies the former, but we present two separate proofs). We derive these results from work of Agol and of Scharlemann and Thompson, by exhibiting explicit connections between the topology of a 3-manifold M on the one hand and width-type parameters of the dual graphs of triangulations of M on the other hand, answering a question that had been raised repeatedly by researchers in computational 3-manifold topology.
    [Show full text]
  • CMSC 754: Lecture 18 Introduction to Computational Topology
    CMSC 754 Ahmed Abdelkader (Guest) CMSC 754: Lecture 18 Introduction to Computational Topology The introduction presented here is mainly based on Edelsbrunner and Harer's Computational Topology, while drawing doses of inspiration from Ghrist's Elementary Applied Topology; it is mostly self-contained, at the expense of brevity and less rigor here and there to fit the short span of one or two lectures. An excellent textbook to consult is Hatcher's Algebraic Topology, which is freely available online: https://pi.math.cornell.edu/~hatcher/AT/AT.pdf. 2 What is Topology? We are all familiar with Euclidean spaces, especially the plane R where we 3 draw our figures and maps, and the physical space R where we actually live and move about. Our direct experiences with these spaces immediately suggest a natural metric structure which we can use to make useful measurements such as distances, areas, and volumes. Intuitively, a metric recognizes which pairs of locations are close or far. In more physical terms, a metric relates to the amount of energy it takes to move a particle of mass from one location to another. If we are able to move particles between a pair of locations, we say the locations are connected, and if the locations are close, we say they are neighbors. In every day life, we frequently rely more upon the abstract notions of neighborhoods and connectedness if we are not immediately concerned with exact measurements. For instance, it is usually not a big deal if we miss the elevator and opt to take the stairs, or miss an exit on the highway and take the next one; these pairs of paths are equivalent if we are not too worried about running late to an important appointment.
    [Show full text]
  • Applied Computational Topology for Point Clouds and Sparse Timeseries Data
    Applied Computational Topology for Point Clouds and Sparse Timeseries Data Thesis by Melissa Yeung In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Pasadena, California 2017 Defended June 8, 2016 ii c 2017 Melissa Yeung All rights reserved iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The opportunity to devote uninterrupted time to graduate studies is one of great privilege. A graduate education often marks the beginning of a research career, where one endeavors to expand human knowledge and to make the world a better place for the next generation. Thus, first and foremost, I would like to thank the United States taxpayer, for contributing their hard-earned dollars so that I could have the opportunity to learn, to dream, and to discover. This dissertation would not have been possible without the support of my advisor, Mathieu Desbrun. Thank you for the freedom to explore, the op- portunity to find my own path, for letting me take the scenic route. I also owe much of my graduate experience to Dmitriy Morozov, who has been an indispensable guide and mentor in the world of computational topology and life. Thank you for teaching me the fundamentals—both in computa- tional topology and in high performance computing—and for ensuring that I would always have opportunities—opportunities to present my work, to learn computational topology from the luminaries, and to find belonging in one of the most supportive and welcoming mathematical communities. The journey that led me to a Ph.D. is improbable. I owe many of my successes along this journey to the numerous individuals who have supported and encouraged me along the way: Miklos Abert, David Beckstead, Collin Bleak, Karen Brucks, Danny Calegari, Gunnar Carlsson, Michael Dorff, Benson Farb, Erica Flapan, Deanna Haunsperger, Stephen Kennedy, David E.
    [Show full text]
  • Connecting 3-Manifold Triangulations with Monotonic Sequences of Bistellar flips
    Connecting 3-manifold triangulations with monotonic sequences of bistellar flips Benjamin A. Burton Alexander He The University of Queensland The University of Queensland [email protected] [email protected] December 7, 2020 Abstract A key result in computational 3-manifold topology is that any two triangulations of the same 3-manifold are connected by a finite sequence of bistellar flips, also known as Pachner moves. One limitation of this result is that little is known about the structure of this sequence|knowing more about the structure could help both proofs and algorithms. Motivated by this, we show that there must be a sequence that satisfies a rigid property that we call \semi-monotonicity". We also study this result empirically: we implement an algorithm to find such semi-monotonic sequences, and compare their characteristics to less structured sequences, in order to better understand the practical and theoretical utility of this result. Keywords Computational topology, 3-manifolds, triangulations, special spines, bistellar flips, Pach- ner moves 1 Introduction The homeomorphism problem|given two triangulated 3-manifolds, determine whether they are homeo- morphic|is one of the oldest and most important problems in computational low-dimensional topology. Although we now know that there is an algorithm for this problem [10, 17], the algorithm is far too complicated to be implemented, and the best known upper bound on the running time is a tower of exponentials [10]. Nevertheless, we have a variety of techniques that, in practice, often allow us to solve this problem with real data. • If the given 3-manifolds are not homeomorphic, then we can often distinguish them using efficiently computable invariants such as homology groups, or the Turaev-Viro invariants.
    [Show full text]
  • A Fast Branching Algorithm for Unknot Recognition with Experimental
    A FAST BRANCHING ALGORITHM FOR UNKNOT RECOGNITION WITH EXPERIMENTAL POLYNOMIAL-TIME BEHAVIOUR BENJAMIN A. BURTON AND MELIH OZLEN Abstract. It is a major unsolved problem as to whether unknot recogni- tion—that is, testing whether a given closed loop in R3 can be untangled to form a plain circle—has a polynomial time algorithm. In practice, trivial knots (which can be untangled) are typically easy to identify using fast simplifica- tion techniques, whereas non-trivial knots (which cannot be untangled) are more resistant to being conclusively identified as such. Here we present the first unknot recognition algorithm which is always conclusive and, although exponential time in theory, exhibits a clear polynomial time behaviour under exhaustive experimentation even for non-trivial knots. The algorithm draws on techniques from both topology and integer / linear programming, and highlights the potential for new applications of techniques from mathematical programming to difficult problems in low-dimensional topol- ogy. The exhaustive experimentation covers all 2977 non-trivial prime knots with ≤ 12 crossings. We also adapt our techniques to the important topological problems of 3-sphere recognition and the prime decomposition of 3-manifolds. 1. Introduction One of the most well-known computational problems in knot theory is unknot recognition: given a knot K in R3 (i.e., a closed loop with no self-intersections), can it be deformed topologically (without passing through itself) into a trivial unknotted circle? If the answer is “yes” then K is called a trivial knot, or the unknot (as in Figure 1(a)); if the answer is “no” then K is called a non-trivial knot (as in Figure 1(b)).
    [Show full text]
  • The Computational Complexity of Knot Genus and Spanning Area
    TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 358, Number 9, September 2006, Pages 3821–3850 S 0002-9947(05)03919-X Article electronically published on December 20, 2005 THE COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY OF KNOT GENUS AND SPANNING AREA IAN AGOL, JOEL HASS, AND WILLIAM THURSTON Abstract. We show that the problem of deciding whether a polygonal knot in a closed three-dimensional manifold bounds a surface of genus at most g is NP-complete. We also show that the problem of deciding whether a curve in a PL manifold bounds a surface of area less than a given constant C is NP-hard. 1. Introduction In this paper we investigate the computational complexity of some problems in three-dimensional topology and geometry. We show that the problem of determin- ing a bound on the genus of a knot in a 3-manifold is NP-complete. Using similar ideas, we show that deciding whether a curve in a metrized PL 3-manifold bounds a surface of area less than a given constant C is NP-hard. Determining whether a given knot is trivial or not is one of the historically cen- tral questions in topology. The problem of finding an algorithm to determine knot triviality was posed by Dehn [1]. Dehn’s investigations into this area led to the formulation of the word and isomorphism problems, which played an important role in the development of the theory of algorithms. The first algorithm for the unknotting problem was given by Haken [3]. Haken’s procedure is based on nor- mal surface theory, a method of representing surfaces introduced by Kneser [14].
    [Show full text]
  • Advances in Applied and Computational Topology, Volume 70
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/psapm/070 AMS SHORT COURSE LECTURE NOTES Introductory Survey Lectures published as a subseries of Proceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics This page intentionally left blank Proceedings of Symposia in APPLIED MATHEMATICS Volume 70 Advances in Applied and Computational Topology AMS Short Course Computational Topology January 4–5, 2011 New Orleans, Louisiana Afra Zomorodian Editor American Mathematical Society Providence, Rhode Island Editorial Board Mary Pugh Lenya Ryzhik Eitan Tadmor (Chair) LECTURE NOTES PREPARED FOR THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY SHORT COURSE COMPUTATIONAL TOPOLOGY HELD IN NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA JANUARY 4–5, 2011 The AMS Short Course Series is sponsored by the Society’s Program Committee for National Meetings. The series is under the direction of the Short Course Subcommittee of the Program Committee for National Meetings. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 55N35, 55U05, 55–04, 37B30, 37M99, 37D45, 55N30, 53C65, 68T37, 68T40, 68W05, 68Q25. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data American Mathematical Society. Short Course on Computational Topology (2011 : New Orleans, La.) Advances in applied and computational topology : American Mathematical Society Short Course on Computational Topology, January 4–5, 2011, New Orleans, Louisiana / Afra Zomoro- dian, editor. p. cm. — (Proceedings of symposia in applied mathematics ; v. 70) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8218-5327-6 (alk. paper) 1. Algebra, Homological—Congresses. 2. Homology theory—Congresses. 3. Ergodic theory— Congresses. I. Zomorodian, Afra J., 1974– II. Title. QA169.A475 2011 514—dc23 2012008031 Copying and reprinting. Material in this book may be reproduced by any means for edu- cational and scientific purposes without fee or permission with the exception of reproduction by services that collect fees for delivery of documents and provided that the customary acknowledg- ment of the source is given.
    [Show full text]